Investor Presentation

28 February 2020

2019 FULL YEAR RESULTS

This document is strictly confidential. Any unauthorised access to,

appropriation of, copying, modification, use or disclosure thereof, in

whole or in part, by any means, for any purpose, infringes GTT’s

rights. This document is part of GTT’s proprietary know-how and

may contain trade secrets protected worldwide by TRIPS and EU

Directives against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure. It is

also protected by Copyright law. The production, offering or placing

on the market of, the importation, export or storage of goods or

services using GTT’s trade secrets or know-how is subject to GTT’s

prior written consent. Any violation of these obligations may give rise

to civil or criminal liability. © GTT, 2010-2020

Disclaimer

2

Disclaimer

This presentation does not contain or constitute an offer of securities for sale or an invitation or inducement to invest in securities in France, the

United States or any other jurisdiction.

It includes only summary information and does not purport to be comprehensive. No representation, warranty or undertaking, express or

implied, is made as to, and no reliance should be placed on, the accuracy, completeness or correctness of the information or opinions contained

in this presentation. None of GTT or any of its affiliates, directors, officers and employees shall bear any liability (in negligence or otherwise) for

any loss arising from any use of this presentation or its contents.

The market data and certain industry forecasts included in this presentation were obtained from internal surveys, estimates, reports and studies,

where appropriate, as well as external market research, including Poten & Partners, Wood Mackenzie and Clarkson Research Services Limited,

publicly available information and industry publications. GTT, its affiliates, shareholders, directors, officers, advisors and employees have not

independently verified the accuracy of any such market data and industry forecasts and make no representations or warranties in relation

thereto. Such data and forecasts are included herein for information purposes only. Where referenced, as regards the information and data

contained in this presentation provided by Clarksons Research and taken from Clarksons Research’s database and other sources, Clarksons

Research has advised that: (i) some information in the databases is derived from estimates or subjective judgments; (ii) the information in the

databases of other maritime data collection agencies may differ from the information in Clarksons Research database; (iii) while Clarksons

Research has taken reasonable care in the compilation of the statistical and graphical information and believes it to be accurate and correct,

data compilation is subject to limited audit and validation procedures.

Any forward-looking statements contained herein are based on current GTT’s expectations, beliefs, objectives, assumptions and projections

regarding present and future business strategies and the distribution environment in which GTT operates, and any other matters that are not

historical fact. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performances and are subject to various risks, uncertainties and other

factors, many of which are difficult to predict and generally beyond the control of GTT and its shareholders. Actual results, performance or

achievements, or industry results or other events, could materially differ from those expressed in, or implied or projected by, these forward-

looking statements. For a detailed description of these risks and uncertainties, please refer to the section “Risk Factors” of the Document de

Référence (“Registration Document”) registered by GTT with the Autorité des Marchés Financiers (“AMF”) on April 30, 2019 and the half-yearly

financial report released on July 25, 2019, which are available on the AMF’s website at www.amf-france.org and on GTT’s website at www.gtt.fr.

The forward-looking statements contained in this presentation are made as at the date of this presentation, unless another time is specified in

relation to them. GTT disclaims any intent or obligation to update any forward-looking statements contained in this presentation.

3

Agenda

1. Company overview & key highlights

2. Core business: Market & Activity update

3. New businesses: LNG Fuel developments

4. Service activity

5. Strategic roadmap

6. Financials

7. Outlook

Appendices

4

Company overview & Key highlights

5

1

GTT at a glance

Profile

A French technology and engineering

company with more than 50-year track

record

Expert in liquefied gas containment systems

GTT is a public company listed on the

Euronext Stock Exchange (Paris),

compartment A

405 highly qualified people(1)

Activities

Designs and licenses membrane

technologies for containment of liquefied gas

Core business: LNG transportation and storage

New business: LNG as fuel for vessel propulsion

Provides design studies, construction

assistance and innovative services

6 (1) As at December 31, 2019- GTT SA / Excluding interns and apprentices. 456 employees at Group level.

© Engie © GTT

Consolidated key figures

in € million FY 2019

Total Revenues 288

Royalties (newbuild)

Services

273

15

Net Income 143

GTT, a green stock

Core business

Business model: pure technology and engineering company,

no direct emissions

Technology: improved performance of LNG carriers with a reduction

of the level of LNGC CO2 emissions by 43% over the last 10 years

LNG demand: mainly driven by Asian countries, progressively

substituting coal to gas for power generation

LNG as Fuel

CO2 emissions: -25% compared to HFO (currently 3% of global

emissions)

No Sox, low Nox, no particulates

Digital

Solutions / softwares / sensors to improve efficiency of vessels and

contribute to the reduction of vessels global emissions

7

GTT’s activities are mainly driven by environmental aspects

2019 Key Highlights

Strong level of new orders, covering the full value chain

57 LNGC, 6 VLEC and 3 GBS

New commercial successes in LNG Fuel business including:

2 bunker ships, 1 container ship converted to LNG on behalf of Hapag Lloyd,

5 container ships on behalf of a European ship-owner

New TALA with Chinese shipyard WISON Offshore & Marine

Technology "LNG Cargo Ready" rating from American Bureau of Shipping for GTT’s latest VLEC model

Approval in principle from Bureau Veritas for icebreakers using Mark III Flex and N096 L03+ technology

Joint agreement between GTT, Lloyd’s Register and several partners for the design of a VLCC using LNG as fuel

New name of GTT’s latest technology: GTT NEXT1 (formerly NO96 Flex)

February 2020: acquisition of Marorka, an expert in Smart Shipping

Proposed dividend up 4% to €3.25 per share, payout of 84%

Notes: LNGC – Liquefied Natural Gas Carrier, VLEC – Very Large Ethane Carrier, FLNG – Floating Liquefied Natural Gas , GBS – Gravity Based Structures, VLCC – Very large Crude Carrier 8

Core business: Market & activity update

9

2

Core Business as at December 31, 2019 A strong order book

LNGC

VLEC

FSRU

FLNG

Onshore storage / GBS

new orders

10

Order book of 133 units

FY 2019 movements

© Shell

57 LNGC

6 VLEC

3 GBS

27 LNGC

3 FSRU deliveries

© SCF Group Notes: LNGC – Liquefied Natural Gas Carrier, VLEC – Very Large Ethane Carrier,

FSRU – Floating Storage and Regasification Unit, FLNG – Floating Liquefied Natural Gas ,

GBS – Gravity Based Structure

Overall long term outlook bright for gas and LNG

Source: BP Energy outlook 2019

Gas share in the energy mix LNG to lead gas trade growth (bcm)

Gas is the only fossil energy to increase share in

the energy mix

Gas is expected to exceed coal by 2025, and could

become 1st source of energy in the early 2040’s

Gas and renewables will account for 85% of energy

demand growth

Drivers: environmental properties, price

and availability

Gas is increasingly exported thanks to LNG

LNG expected to exceed inter regional

pipeline trade in the late 2020’s

Driver: greater flexibility, availability, price.

Source: Evolving transition scenario, BP 2019 outlook, 11

Renewables

Oil

Gas

Coal

Hydro

Nuclear 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2018 2040

Gas consumed locally Pipe LNG

+1,500 cbm

Trade

31% Trade

36%

11% 17%

BP alternative scenarios all point to a prominent share of gas in the energy mix

BP considers 4 scenarios with common

features, such as ongoing economic growth

and a shift towards a lowercarbon fuel mix,

but differ in terms of policy, technology or

behavioural assumptions.

Whatever the scenario, gas grows and

ranks as one of 2 leading energies

Gas demand grows between 37% (Less

Globalization scenario) and 83% (More Energy)

Gas share in the energy mix is estimated by

BP between 25% and 27% in 2040 in all

scenarios (vs 23% today)

Gas position is central in energy transition Source: BP 2019 outlook, GTT 12

3,2 4,6

5,8

4,3 4,3

4 scenarios considered by BP Gas is central in all 4 scenarios

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

200

0

200

1

200

2

20

03

200

4

200

5

200

6

200

7

200

8

200

9

201

0

20

11

201

2

201

3

201

4

201

5

201

6

201

7

201

8

20

19

202

0

202

1

202

2

202

3

202

4

202

5

202

6

202

7

202

8

202

9

203

0

203

1

203

2

203

3

203

4

203

5

Mtp

a

Supply - Operationnal Supply - Under Construction Demand

LNG Supply & Demand: new capacity needed

Sources: Wood Mackenzie Q4 2019 ; GTT Analysis.

NB: NLNG T7 (FID in Dec 19) taken into account

LNG Supply & Demand balance forecast

Supply/Demand balanced until end 2024

More FIDs expected as Supply/Demand gap widens to reach

around 250 Mtpa by 2035

13

NB: Methodology change from Wood Mackenzie: LNG consumed by vessel is now included in supply and demand

250 Mtpa

71 Mtpa sanctioned in 2019, an all time record.

45 Mtpa in 2004 was the previous record (mainly thanks to Qatar FID)

6 FIDS have been taken

3 are equity projects : Golden Pass, Arctic LNG-2, NLNG T7

3 are SPA based projects : Mozambique LNG-1, Calcasieu, Sabine Pass T6

Liquefaction projects: record FIDs in 2019

14

Source: GTT, Wood Mackenzie

Project Country Operator Volume (Mtpa)

Exp Startup

Comments

FID taken in 2019

Golden Pass US Exxon, QP 15.6 2025

Sabine Pass T6 US Cheniere 4.5 2023 Cheniere has now 36 Mtpa capacity at Sabine Pass and Corpus Christi

Mozambique LNG-1 Mozambique Anadarko 12.9 2024 Ownership transfered to Total

Calcasieu Pass US Venture Global 10 2023 18 modularized trains

Arctic LNG-2 Russia Novatek 19.8 2023 3 GBS ordered, at least 15 ice class LNG carriers required

NLNG T7 Nigeria NNPC 7.6 2024 1 new train of 4.2 Mtpa + 3.4 Mtpa debottlenecking

Possible FIDs

Mozambique LNG-4 Mozambique Exxon 15.2 EPC contractor chosen; $500 mln to be spent on initial construction phase

Corpus Christi Stage III US Cheniere 9.5 2 Feedgas contract signed with Apache and EOG

Port Arthur US Sempra 11 SPA of 2Mtpa with PGNiG + HoA of 5 Mtpa signed with Saudi Aramco

Cameron expansion US Sempra 5

Freeport T4 US Freeport 5.1

Lake Charles US Energy Transfer 16 2 SPA totalling 3 Mtpa signed with Shell

Plaquemines US Venture Global 10 2.5 Mtpa signed with PGNiG

Woodfibre Canada Pacific O&G 2.1 SPA signed with BP in June 2019 for 0.75 Mtpa

Tortue Phase 2 Senegal/Mauritania BP 2.4

Pluto expansion Australia Woodside 4.7

Qatar LNG expansion Qatar QP Up to 49 16 Mtpa (2 trains of 8 mtpa) have been added to the 33 Mtpa extension project

85 more LNGCs required for liquefaction projects under construction

15

Market still requires 85 more LNGCs for contracted supply of LNG plants under construction

Expected additional FIDs and fleet replacement could increase that number

Source: GTT

LNGCs supply demand balance of Under Construction liquefaction plants

Project LocationForecasted

Start-Up

Contracted

Capacity

(mtpa)

LNGCs requirement

Cameron T3 US East 2020 4,0

Freeport Train 3 US East 2020 4,6

PFLNG 2 Asia Pacific 2021 1,4

Corpus Christi T3 US East 2022 4,5

Tangguh Phase 2 Asia Pacific 2022 4,5

Calcasieu Pass US East 2023 8,0

Coral FLNG East Africa 2023 3,4

TortueFLNG West Africa 2023 2,4

Arctic LNG-2 Russia 2023 19,8

Sabine Pass T6 US East 2023 4,5

LNG Canada Canada West 2024 14,0

Mozambique LNG (Area 1) East Africa 2024 11,2

NLNG T7+expansion West Africa 2024 8,0

Golden Pass US East 2025 15,6

172

80

- Available vessels in operation 7

85

TOTAL

- Current Orderbook

Expected orders

Contracted LNG price remain steady despite low spot price environment

Sources: Argus, EIA, Wood Mackenzie,

LNG spot & contracted prices

Mild winter and Coronavirus have pushed LNG spot prices to record low

Below $3/Mmbtu in Asia and below $2,5/Mmbtu in mid-February

Henry Hub is also below $2 Mmbtu

Contracted LNG prices are not affected by spot market fluctuations

LNG projects financing is based on contracted price expectations

Contracted US LNG is competitive in Asia (even with 25% tariff)

16

Contracted oil linked Asian LNG price = JCC * 13% + 0,5$

Contracted US LNG price delivered in Asia = Henry Hub * 1,15 + 2,25$ + 1,43$

0

2

4

6

8

10

12$

/Mm

btu

Oil linked Asian Price

Spot price

Contracted price

US LNG price delivered in Asia

European

LNG

Asian

LNG

2019 Global LNG demand increasing

Global LNG demand: +12.5% in 2019

China continues to be among top 3

+14% or 6 Mtpa

South Asia (India, Pakistan, Bengladesh)

+19% in 2019

Japan and Korea decreasing due to nuclear restart

Europe increasing (UK and France, Spain, Netherlands)

17

China expected to remain a dominant region

Efforts continue to improve

urban air quality

Sustained long term growth

expected by 2030

5 importing terminals under

construction + 11 expansions

planned at existing terminals

18

3,2 4,6

5,8

4,3 4,3

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

0

20

40

60

80

100

201

2

201

3

201

4

20

15

201

6

201

7

201

8

201

9

20

20

202

1

202

2

202

3

202

4

202

5

202

6

202

7

202

8

202

9

203

0

LNG demand in China Annual growth

China LNG demand by 2030

33% 46% 41%

Source: Wood Mackenzie

China’s choice to widely consume LNG has significantly reduced its CO2 emissions

19

In 2019, China has consumed 61 million tons of LNG

it consumed less than 10 million tons 10 years ago

By choosing LNG, instead of building new generation

coal plants, China has saved more

than 200 million tons of CO2 during 2019

Equivalent to total Netherlands CO2 emissions in 2019

Source: BP Statistical Review

When China reduces its coal consumption by 1%

and uses LNG instead, it reduces CO2 emissions

by more than 60 million tons

Equivalent to total Austria CO2 emissions in 2019

Main Sources: GTT, Clarksons, Wood Mackenzie, Sims, et al., 2007, Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air, BP Statistical Review

0,0%

0,5%

1,0%

1,5%

2,0%

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

LNG share in Chinese energy mix

GTT supports CO2 emissions reductions thanks to continuous improvements of its systems

20

The 2010s have seen major evolutions leading to reduction of LNGC CO2 emissions Lower Boil off: GTT new products : Mark III Flex, Mark III Flex+, NO 96GW, NO 96+

Engine improvements : DFDE and then MEGI/XDF

Greater capacities: 145k cbm to today’s 174k cbm standard

The 188 modern vessels delivered since 2010 (58 MEGI/XDF and 130 DFDE) save

more than 5 million tons CO2 every year vs 2010 Steam Turbine vessels

Comparison of 2 typical LNG carriers in 2010 (Steam Turbine) and 2020 (MEGI/XDF)

Engine type LNG tank Boil Off Size Consumption

CO2 saved

per cbm

transported*

Steam Turbine Mark III 0,15% 145k cbm 110t/d -

MEGI / XDF Mark III Flex+ 0,07% 174k cbm 75t/d 43%

* CO2 saved per cbm transported vs 2010 Steam turbine vessel Source: GTT, Clarksons

2030 IMO objective of 40% reduction of CO2 per ton transported vs 2008

is already achieved thanks to continuous improvements since 2010.

Core business long term estimates

GTT order estimates over 2020-2029 GTT FY 2019 Sales

LNGC: between 285 and 315 units(1)

VLEC: between 25 and 40 units

FSRU: between 10 and 20 units

FLNG: Up to 5 units

Onshore and GBS tanks: between 15 and

20 units

Courtesy of Excelerate Energy Courtesy of Shell

21 (1) Including replacement market

LNGC80%

FSRU

9%

FLNG

2%

LNG Fuel

3%

Other1%

Services

5%

New businesses: LNG Fuel developments

3.2

22

3

New Business (LNG as Fuel) as at December 31, 2019 A growing order book

ULCS (Ultra Large Container Ships)

Container vessel (converted to LNG)

Cruise ship

LNG bunker ships

new orders

23

Order book of 19 units FY 2019 movements

© SCF Group

2 LNG Bunker ship

1 Container vessel

5 ULCS

© GTT © GTT

Source : DNV

LNG is the only mature solution allowing comprehensive environmental compliance

0

0,25

0,5

0,75

1

SOX NOX CO2 Particulates

Ba

se 1

Comparison of emissions by fuel type

HFO

HFO+ Scrubber

LSHFO

LNG

LNG is in advance of existing and anticipated environmental regulations

No SOx, no particulates, low NOx, reduced CO2 emissions

Implementation in January 2021 of NOx reduction in North Sea and Baltic sea

will further degrade oil fuel’s and Scrubber’s competitiveness

24

Business case is very favorable to LNG as fuel for large containerships

25

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

2022

(Year

1)

Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15

M$

vs LSHFO vs Scrubber

NPV of LNG fuel vs scrubbers and LSHFO for a 14k TEU containership

Payback c.3 years vs other solutions

Main hypothesis

•Large containership: 14,000 TEU

•Route: Asia <-> Europe

•Avg Consumption.: 150t/d HFO

•Brent price: ~60-65$/b on average over the period

•Over-CapEx (vs. conventionnal vessels):

LNG as fuel : choice of LNG fuel for large containerships saves 30,000 tons of CO2 / year

26

The choice of LNG vs oil to fuel a single 23k TEU containership saves as much as:

CO2: 15,000 cars taken out of the road

Particulates: around 1 million cars taken out of the road

NOx: 2.5 million cars taken out of the road

SOx: 30 million cars taken out of the road

Fuel type Energy content

Engine efficiency

Over-consumption

SOx NOx Particulates

PM CO2

Mmbtu/ton g/kWh %m/m g/kWh g/kg fuel kg/kWh

Oil fuels (Compliant fuels

or HFO+ Scrubber)

40-42 140 2-3% (if

scrubber) 0,5% 7-15 1-1,5 0,27-0,28

LNG fuel 48 180 0% <1,5

(MEGI) 0 0,21

LNG vs oil fuel

15-20% more

energy density

+5-7% more

efficient (excl higher

energy content)

2-3% gain vs

scrubber

No Sox in LNG

Nox: - 80/90%

No particulates

in LNG

CO2: -20/25%

Comparison of emissions for 2 fuel types : oil fueled and LNG fueled

Assumptions : Consumption of a 23k TEU containership : 150tonHFOeq/d/ Emissions of a car: CO2 : 150g/km / Nox:70mg/km and Particulates PM 4,5mg/km (Euro 6d norm) / SOx car fuel content: 0,001%/ Average

annual use of a car in Europe: 15,000 kms, consumption :6L/100kms

Main Sources: GTT,DNV GL, ABS, Sims, et al., 2007, Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air, European parliament,

Open loop scrubbers utilization banned areas keep expanding

27

Map of areas where the use of open loop scrubbers is banned

Since October 2019, 4 areas have banned the use of open loop scrubbers

in their waters: Panama canal, Malaysia, Suez Canal, Karachi (Pakistan)

Newbuild & Retrofit

• Ferries

• Ro-Ro

• Tugs

• Small Containers

• Small Tankers

• Small bulkers

• …

300-400 vessels

350-450k cbm

Membrane is consolidating its penetration in LNG fuel market

28

1 2 3+

1,000

5,000

10,000

20,000

LNG tanks total

capacity - cbm

Type B

Type C

Newbuild & Retrofit

• Ultra & Very Large

Container Vessels

• Cruise ships

(expedition)

15-20 vessels

200-300k cbm

Newbuild

• Very Large Container

Vessels

10-15 vessels

100-150k cbm

Number of market segment penetrated

Main sources: Clarksons, DNV GL

LNG as a marine fuel continues its

penetration in shipping market

despite a persisting wait & see

attitude

9% market share in 2019

Most of the c.90 LNG fuelled vessels

ordered in 2019 were small

capacities in Type C

Mainly < 1,000 cbm, and up to 6,000

cbm

In 2019, membrane success was

focused on very large containerships

after penetrating cruise ships in 2018

Breakthrough with first large

conversion ever

Type B technology is penetrating

very large containerships but with

limited track record

LNG fuel tanks competitive landscape

LNG Fuel market potential for GTT

Shipping Markets Relevant Market Segments

for GTT

Historical 10y

annual orders Fleet at end 2019

MAIN TARGETS

Container Ships 3-20+ kTEU

~225 ~5500 Bulkers 100+ kdwt

Oil Tankers 125+ kdwt

Cruise Ships All size ~35 ~1200

Car & Truck Carriers

TOTAL SHIPPING MARKET

All vessels

(excl. LNGC, FSRU…) 100 GT+ 2,400 ~98,000

Source: GTT analysis, Clarksons

Global market represents a pool of ~2,400 ships per year (newbuilds)

GTT is particularly focusing on a segment of ~ 260 ships per year (newbuilds)

With expected recovery of shipping market and LNG fuel penetration rising, LNG fueled

orders should multiply

29

Service activity

3.3

30

4

Services to make LNG easy

Support of GTT’s LNG core activities

Support for the development of LNG as fuel

31

CONSULTING

to get LNG as fuel

projects on track

to raise awareness

about LNG to support operators in the

first LNG operations

to avoid escalation and

minimise impacts

to support the industry’s

digital transformation

to maintain the industry’s

track record

to facilitate LNG tanks

maintenance

to enable projects and

support daily operations

DIGITAL MAINTENANCE TESTS

TRAINING LNG OPERATIONS EMERGENCY

ENGINEERING

Acquisition of Marorka, a new step in GTT’s digital roadmap

A leading global provider of data-driven energy management and operational performance

solutions for the international maritime industry

Marorka focuses on fuel savings, emission reduction compliance and reporting, and performance

optimization

More than 600 vessels installed

Good technical, commercial and geographical complementarity with Ascenz

Products

32

Data Acquisition

Located on-board the vessel, the system allows electronic measurement logging

and collects data for performance monitoring

Onboard Advisory

Based on the operational data collected, Marorka Onboard enables monitoring

and improvement of energy management efficiency and operational performance.

Main advisory modules: machinery operation, fuel consumption, voyage

optimization, optimal trim and report generation

Marorka Online

Marorka Online is a cloud-based fleet performance reporting system. It provides

the shore-based personnel with access to fleet performance data.

Main modules: fleet performance dashboard, performance optimization and

benchmarking, and emissions monitoring reports

Services

Energy management advisory services

Training services for a successful implementation and usage of the Marorka solution

Strategic roadmap

33

5

GTT’s strategic roadmap

34

Towards a lower emission

maritime world

5. Enlargement

4. Advisory and services

2. Enhancement

3. Improvement

Gas handling

technologies

Smart shipping Offshore

Multigas

GBS

Evolution

of NO 96

& Mark

systems

Advisory services

Intervention services

Training

LNG as

fuel

Transfer

operations 1. Intensification

LNG Carriers

6. Transformation

Financials

35

6

Order book by year of delivery (units per year)(1)

In units

Order book overview (core business)

Order book in units

In units

36

Order book in value

In €M

Revenues expected from current order book(2)

In €M

+ 34%

(1) Delivery dates could move according to the shipyards/EPCs’ building timetables.

(2) Royalties from core business, i.e. excluding LNG as Fuel, services activity.

2019 financial performance

Key highlights Summary consolidated accounts

(2)

(1) Defined as EBIT + amortisations and impairments of fixed assets

(2) Defined as EBITDA - capex - change in working capital

In € M 2018 2019 Change

Total Revenues 246.0 288.2 +17.2%

EBITDA(1) 168.7 174.3 +3.3%

Margin (%) 68.6% 60.5%

Operating Income 159.9 170.0 +6.3%

Margin (%) 65.0% 59.0%

Net income 142.8 143.4 +0.4%

Margin (%) 58.1% 49.7%

Free Cash Flow(2) 217.2 154.9 -28.7%

Change in Working

Capital -60.3 +10.4 nm

Capex 11.8 9.0 -23.7%

Dividend paid 98.5 122.0 +23.9%

in € M 31/12/2018 31/12/2019

Cash Position 173.2 169.0

Revenues

Newbuilds (royalties): +18.1%, mainly driven by

LNGCs (+16.2%),FLNGs (+38.3%) and LNG as fuel

Service revenue: +2.7%, mainly due to an increase of

maintenance services and Ascenz activities, and a

decrease of pre-engineering studies

EBITDA: +3.3% / +13.6% excluding 2018 one-off items

Increase of external charges: +31.7% due to

increased number of new orders

Increase of staff costs: +12.7%

2018 one-off items: reversal of provision

Net profit: +0.4% / +12.6% excluding one-off items

2018 one-off: reversal of provision, tax refund and

impairment charge

Capex:

Impact of Ascenz acquisition in 2018

New building at headquarters in 2019

37

2019 Cost base

GTT consolidated operational costs Key highlights

External costs: +32%

Subcontractors +50%, due to strong flow of orders

Other external costs +19% (mainly fees from

external advisors and patent filing)

Staff costs up 13%, mainly due to the increase

in headcount (+10%)

GTT 2019 costs(1) by nature

External costs

48%

in € M 2018 2019 Change (%)

Goods purchased (3.0) (7.1) +136.9%

% sales -1% -2%

Subcontracted Test and

Studies (17.8) (26.7) +50.3%

Rental and Insurance (4.4) (4.8) +10.3%

Travel Expenditures (8.0) (9.6) +19.8%

Other External Costs (10.8) (12.8) +18.5%

Total External Costs (41.0) (53.9) +31.7%

% sales -17% -19%

Salaries and Social

Charges (38.2) (42.1) +10.2%

Share-based payments (0.6) (2.2) nm

Profit Sharing (7.0) (7.3) +4.3%

Total Staff Costs (45.8) (51.6) +12.7%

% sales -19% -18%

Other(1) 0.3 - nm

% sales 0% 0%

Staff costs

46%

Cost of sales

6%

(1) Excluding depreciations, amortisations, provisions and impairment of assets

38

2018 2019Interim Final

Dividend

(1) Dividend payout ratio calculated on profit distributed (and possible distribution of reserves) as % of consolidated net profit for the financial year.

€3.12

€115.6 M

81%

€3.25

€120.5 M

84%

Consolidated net profit (IFRS)

Total dividend

Dividend per share

Total amount paid

Pay out ratio

Dividend

amount

€142.8 M €143.4 M

2018 2019

39

3.25 3.12 +4%

Balance dividend

of €1.75

- Record date:

June 8, 2020

- Payment date:

June 10, 2020

1.79 1.75

1.33 1.50

Outlook

40

7

2020 Outlook

GTT revenue(1) 2020 consolidated revenue estimated in a range of €375M to €405M

Dividend

Payment(2) 2020 and 2021 payout of at least 80%

EBITDA 2020 consolidated EBITDA estimated in a range of €235M to €255M

(1) In the absence of any significant delays or cancellations in orders. Variations in order intake between periods could lead to fluctuations in revenues

(2) Subject to approval of Shareholders' meeting. GTT by-laws provide that dividends may be paid in cash or in shares based on each shareholder’s preference

41

CONFIDENTIAL Masque PowerPoint - January 2020

Image courtesy of STX, Engie, Excelerate, Reliance, SCF Group, Shell, CMA CGM, Conrad

Thank you for your attention

42

Appendix

43

A streamlined group and organisation (December 31, 2019)

* Member of the executive committee

GT

T G

rou

p

Philippe Berterottière* Chairman and Chief Executive

Officer

GT

T S

A o

rgan

isati

on

Lélia Ghilini*

Secretary General

General Counsel

Julien Bec

LNG as fuel

~17 employees

Frédérique

Coeuille*

Innovation

~102 employees

David Colson*

Commercial

~28 employees

Karim Chapot*

Technical

~194 employees

Marc Haestier*

Finance &

Administration

~40 employees

Sandrine Vibert*

Human

Resources

~13 employees

44

GTT exposure to the liquefied gas shipping and storage value chain

Source: Company data

Offshore clients:

shipyards

Onshore

clients:

EPC

contractors Onshore storage

liquefaction plant

Onshore storage re-

gasification terminal

Floating LNG Production,

Storage and Offloading

unit (FLNG)

Liquefied Natural Gas

Carrier

(LNGC)

Floating Storage and

Regasification Unit (FSRU)

LNG fuelled

ship

Gas-to-wire

Power plant

Platform /

Installation

Tank in

industrial plant

Ethane/ multigas

Carriers

Barge

Exploration

& Production Liquefaction Shipping Regasification

Off Take /

Consumption

45

GTT ecosystem

End clients and prescribers

licences its membrane

technology and receives

royalties

provides engineering

studies, on-site technical

and maintenance

assistance

receives new

technology

certification and

approval

provides services

provides services

and maintenance

Oil & Gas

Companies Shipowners

Classification

Societies

Shipyards Direct clients

End clients and prescribers

Regulatory oversight of the industry

46

GTT membrane technologies

General principle:

Two membranes

Two layers of insulations

Containment system

anchored to the inner hull

47

Mark III system NO96 system

Primary

membrane

Secondary

membrane

Hull

Primary insulation

Secondary insulation

56 ageing vessels with charter contract ending by 2023

LNGCs carriers* with charter contract ending by 2023

Source: Wood Mackenzie

100 LNGC chart contract to end by 2023

Of which 56 equipped with steam turbine

propulsion; also smaller vessels (<140k

cbm)

Charterers and ship-owners to prepare the

shift to more modern vessels

Better economics

Some Majors already started selling and

replacing part of their ageing fleet (e.g.

Shell, NWS project) * Above 50k cbm

48

22

9 12 13

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

2020 2021 2022 2023

MEGI/XDF

DFDE

Steam Turbine

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

LNG

pri

ce

($

/Mm

btu

)

Oil price ($/bl)

2019 has been very competitive for US LNG vs Asian LNG

High oil prices ($70/bl) vs low Henry Hub prices ($2,6/Mmbtu)

US LNG ≈ $6.8/Mmbtu

Asian LNG ≈ $9,5/Mmbtu

US LNG is competitive in Asia U

S L

NG

Asian LNG Asian oil indexed LNG competitive

US

LN

G c

om

pe

titive

US LNG vs. Asian LNG price depending on Henry Hub and Oil prices

US LNG:

• HH+15%

• Tolling Fee: 2.25$

• Shipping: 1.43$ (US East ->Japan,

174k cbm Me-GI or X-DF)

Hypothesis

Asian LNG:

• Slope: 13% of JCC price

• Constant: 0.5$

Main sources:

GTT analysis, EIA, Wood Mackenzie

Sp

read

HH : $2,5/Mmbtu

HH : $3/Mmbtu

HH : $3,5/Mmbtu

49

2019 avg.

Despite 25% tariff, US LNG remains economic in China (US LNG+tariff =$8,6/Mmbtu)

These economics still favors US FIDs, despite low LNG price on the spot market

LNG short term charter rates

50

LNGCs – Our main business

Vessels equipped for transporting LNG

Existing GTT fleet: 384 units1

In order: 113 units1

26 construction shipyards under license1

Our strengths

Technological leadership, boil-off divided by 2 in the last 5 years

Long term industrial partnerships with major shipyards

A unique position in the LNG ecosystem, nurtured by 50 years of

experience, expertise and customer orientation

51

1 As at 30 December 2019

FSRUs – The game changer for new importing countries

Major competitive advantage vs. land-based terminals:

Quick to build/deploy & mobile

Better local acceptability & easier permitting

Affordable / no upfront CapEx

Adapted to more volatile LNG prices

Quality controlled construction in shipyards with available

and skilled workforce

More than 40 FSRUs

currently in service or

under construction

Worldwide development

Asia (India, China, …)

Europe

(Turkey, Croatia, …)

South & West Africa

LatAm & Carribeans

Courtesy of Excelerate Energy

52

FSRUs market outlook

Source: Poten 2018

FLNGs – the new frontier of the LNG world

Main drivers

Monetisation of stranded

offshore gas reserves

Better acceptability (no NIMBY

syndrom)

Floating units which ensure

treatment of gas, liquefy and store it

Existing GTT fleet: 2 units1

In order: 2 units1

GTT key advantages

Extended amortization

perspectives

Deck space available for

liquefaction equipment

More affordable cost

Courtesy of Shell

53 1 As at 30 December 2019

Arctic LNG-2 recent FID: a great opportunity for GTT to expand in the LNG value chain with 1st GBS ordered

54

From liquefaction

plant

To

Regasification

GBS Ice class

LNG carrier

Conventional

LNG carrier

Trans

shipment Regas

terminal:

Onshore or

FSRU

The Arctic LNG-2 project sanctioned in September 2019 represents a great achievement

for GTT who will equip 3 GBS of 229k cbm each

GTT could be present all along the value chain, by equipping GBS, Ice class LNG

carriers and conventional LNG carriers

GBS is suitable for a very wide range of applications

LNG SUPPLY CHAIN

• Liquefaction or regasification plants

• Peak Shaving

• Satellite Station

• Inland distribution

BUNKERING

• LNG as fuel

POWER

• Industry Company

• Captive Power

GBS range

Markets

5k 200k+

55

50k

@ SemCorp

Storage capacity (cbm)

LOCATION

• Islands, remote costal areas, isolated industrial needs (ex.: mining), …

Concrete or steel, installed in jetty, breakwater dike or nearshore

Location

@ Acciona

Ethane: Order of 6 VLEC in September 2019

Transportation of Liquefied Ethane is an increasing

market, driven by the strong development of shale gas

and shale oil production in the US

Excess supply of ethane (byproduct of shale oil

and shale gas) and interdiction to flare have

pushed the US to start exporting ethane in 2014

Market to further develop and exports to rise

56

An increasing ethane transportation market

Vessels size increase make GTT membrane very competitive

With the 6 VLEC, GTT breaks its own capacity record

for VLECs

98k cbm vs 88k cbm for the 6 Reliance ordered

in 2014

Increasing size of vessels is favorable to GTT

technology

Source: Clarksons

US ethane production, consumptions and exports

Focus on GTT’s competitive advantages on LNGCs

Source: Company data and comment (December 31, 2019), Clarksons

(1) Other technologies are being developed, however are not known to have obtained final orders to date (e.g. DSME’s Solidus). Excludes vessel orders below 50,000 m3

GTT’s technology positioning (1)

GTT Moss SPB KC-1

Technology

▶ Integrated tank

(membrane)

▶ Atmospheric pressure

▶ Self supported spheric tank

▶ Atmospheric pressure

▶ Self supported prismaticl tank

▶ Atmospheric pressure

▶ Integrated tank

(membrane)

▶ Atmospheric pressure

CAPEX

▶ Requires less steel and

aluminum than tanks for

a given LNG capacity

▶ Higher costs ▶ Higher costs ▶ Slightly higher costs

than GTT

OPEX

▶ More efficient use of

space

▶ Limited BOR (0.07%)

▶ Higher fuel / fee costs ▶ Higher fuel / fee costs ▶ Higher opex due to

BOR (0.16%)

LNGCs in

construction ▶ 115 ▶ 0 ▶ 0 ▶ 0

LNGCs in

operation ▶ 384 ▶ 129 ▶ 4 (+2 small) ▶ 2 (on repair)

Other ▶ Value added services ▶ Higher centre of gravity;

harder to navigate

▶ Huge losses and delays on

vessels in orderbook.

No significant experience

▶ Korean technology with

little experience at sea

GTT technologies : cost effective, volume optimisation and high return of experience

57

LNG is cheap and stable vs volatile oil fuels

58

Normalisation of the energy content of the different fuels + engine efficiencies differencies taken into account

LNG fuel prices are contracted prices (oil, HH, NBP/TTF indexation).

NB: LNG prices include $100/ton bunkering

Main sources : Wood Mackenzie, Argus, EIA, Platts, CME, Bunker Index, Delft University, GTT, Win GD

Evolution of marine fuel prices since 2018 (Delivered onboard)

Despite IMO 2020 entering into force, HFO prices remain at similar levels as LNG fuel in Asia

Thanks to diverse indexation , contracted LNG prices are very stable vs oil fuels.

LSHFO prices are currently in the range of MGO.

LNG fuel Asia

LNG fuel Europe

LNG fuel US

HFO

MGO

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

750

$/t

on

HFO

eq

,eff

GTT’s LNG Fuel solutions offering

GTT has developed solutions for the main applications of LNG Fuel

New LNG Brick®

dedicated to medium-sized merchant vessels

test phase completed

Solutions for Container Vessels new build and retrofit

Lean bunker barge to

standardize the market Cost effective solution for bulk carriers

Cruise Ship – optimizing the space for additional

passengers

59

LNG Fuel: wide network of partnerships

25 shipyards under licensed agreements

Network of membrane tank outfitters

A close relationship with engine makers and FGHS1 providers

(1) Fuel Gas Handling System

60

Commercial successes: container ships…

CMA CGM ULCS – Newbuilds – 18,600 m³

9 ships in November 2017

Shipyards :

5 ships in Hudong-Zhonghua

4 ships in Jiangnan Shipyard

Hapag Lloyd VLCS - LNG Retrofit – 6,700 m³

1 ship in April 2019

Hudong-Zhonghua as membrane outfitter

ULCS: Ultra Large Container Ship

European ship-owner ULCS – Newbuilds –

14,000 m³

5 ships in June 2019

Built at Jiangnan Shipyard

61

… Cruise ships and bunker vessels

62

PONANT Expedition Ship – 4,500 m³

1 ship in July 2018

Built at VARD Norway

GTT acting as EPC for the LNG tank

MOL1 LNG Bunkering Vessel – 12,000 m³

1 ship in March 2019

Built at SembCorp Marine Shipyard

Oct. 2018 MOL1 LNG Bunkering Vessel – 18,600 m³

1 ship in January 2018 and 1 ship in December 2019

Built at Hudong Zhonghua Shipyard

1 Mitsui OSK Lines

Focus on GTT’s competitive advantages on LNG fuel

Source: Company data and comment (December 31, 2019), Clarksons, DNV GL

GTT’s technology positioning on LNG fuel

GTT Membrane Prismatic Type B Type C

Technology

principle

▶ Integrated tank

▶ Atmospheric pressure

▶ Self supported tank

▶ Atmospheric pressure

▶ Self supported Cylindrical tank

▶ Pressurized

▶ Insulation: vaccum (smaller tanks) or

foam (larger tanks)

Space

optimization

▶ High: Integrated tank and

unique design for each vessel

▶ Moderate to high : Inspection space,

restricted filling limits (heel)

▶ Low: Cylindrical design, restricted filling

limits (pressurized)

Boil off ▶ Low ▶ Low to medium ▶ High (foam)

CAPEX

▶ Moderate cost: Requires less

steel and aluminum than other

tanks for a given LNG capacity

▶ Higher cost, as much metal is used

(Aluminum or Nickel) and many

workers required for welding

▶ Lower cost (foam), high cost for vaccum

Sloshing

▶ Reinforced foam for LNG fuel

tanks

▶ Chamfers

▶ Tank shape

▶ Metallic structure

▶ Tank shape

▶ Metallic structure

LNG fueled

vessels in

operation

▶ High experience with >400

vessels in operation (LNGCs,

FSRUs, …)

▶ Limited experience at sea (few

LNGCs, with delays and high cost

overrun during construction)

▶ 175 (mainly with tanks <1k cbm, vaccum)

LNG fueled

vessels in

construction

▶ 19 (18+ 1 conversion) ▶ 11 ▶ 200 (mainly with tanks <1k cbm, vaccum)

Others ▶ High end design

▶ High metal content => high price and

weight, complex welding, thermal

resistance, long cooling down,…

▶ Potential outer tank corrosion

▶ Easy to install for a shipyard

▶ Exposed to salinity, meteorology

▶ Easier for conversion if tank on deck

▶ Generic technology

▶ Esay to install for a shipyard

63

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

0 5 10 15 20 25

Cash collection Revenue IFRS 15

An attractive business model supporting high cash generation

Source: Company

(1) Illustrative cycle for the first LNGC ordered by a particular customer, including engineering studies completed by GTT

Invoicing and revenue recognition Business model supports high cash generation

Months from receipt of order

Revenue is recognized pro-rata

temporis between construction

milestones

Initial payment collected from

shipyards at the effective date of

order of a particular vessel (10%)

Steel cutting (20%)

Keel laying (20%)

Ship launching (20%)

Delivery (30%)

% of contract (1)

Steel cutting

Keel laying

Ship

launching

Delivery c. 9 to12 months

studies c. 18 months

royalties

64

Evolution of new

GTT orders (1)(2)

163

222251

142

75 5689

218 227 226 237 232 246288

57%

65% 64%

42%

31% 33%

44%

55%51% 52% 51% 50%

58%50%

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Revenue Net Margin

34

19

4 17

44

26

37

47

35

5

21

51

66

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

LNGC/VLEC FSRU/FLNG Onshore storage / GBS Barge

Source: Company

(1) Orders received by period / Core business

(2) Excl. vessel conversions

(3) Represents order position as at December based on company data, including LNGC, VLEC, FLNG, FSRU and on-shore storage units

(4) Figures presented in IFRS consolidated from 2016 to 2018, IFRS from 2010 to 2015, French GAAP from 2006 to 2009

Evolution of

revenue (in € M)

and net margin (4)

99 120 112 66 30 18 52 77

Backlog (# of orders)

Appendix: track record of high margin and strong backlog

114 118

2008

Economic crisis

US shale gas boom

2011

Fukushima

89

65

96 97 133

Contact: information-financiere@gtt.fr / +33 1 30 23 20 87